Featured Post

Abortion is The Evil of our generation

So yesterday I came across a rather  appalling article  that tried to make it sound like states having increased abortion restrictions were ...

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Why I do not want another 4 years of Obama

So it's election year.  And for the first time in my life, I'm actually interested in the election beyond the 30 second sound byte consumption I've been comfortable with in the past.  Sure, I was watching with interest over the 2000 election's Florida drama, but I honestly didn't care who came out on top.  This time, however, I feel a tugging on my soul that's telling me that this election is the most important election of my generation.   Probably the biggest election before this one would have to be Reagan unseating Carter in 1980.  I even think this upcoming election trumps the beginning of the Reagan era and the resurgence of conservatism.

What's got me so interested this time around?  It's not our Republican candidates for sure.  I'll admit that Romney just doesn't excite me at all.  About the only candidate that came close to doing that was Newt.  I knew he never really had a shot at the candidacy.  He's got too much baggage.  But the guy was smart and had big ideas.  I'm a sucker for big, grandiose ideas.  Even then though, it was a passing, "wow that guy's pretty sharp and frank, I like that."   I was also interested in Cain, but then his campaign was immediately torpedo'ed by the scandal sub.   None of the candidates seemed to grab that all important "spark" that ignites within a true believer.  Chris Christie, Allen West, or Jeb Bush would have brought the spark, but alas.  

No, what has me interested is preventing Obama from having free reign for 4 years.  Without the constraints of a re-election, there's virtually nothing holding him back.  And you don't need to take my word for it, Obama pretty much spells it out himself with his open mic gaffe with Russian PM Dmitri Medvedev.  Capitulating to that thug Putin aside, the idea of him being more "flexible" after election is quite alarming.  It points to someone who's been "playing it safe" these last 3.5 years to avoid being voted out.  Ok, so what?  He's just being a politician, right?  Yeah, much to my dismay and disgust, many politicians are  guilty of doing this (that rant will be for a future post).  But when I begin to dig into Barack Obama's influences and combine that with his current policies and agendas, what I see is a startling picture of an anti-American socialist with a passive aggressive agenda.  


First, let's start with his policies.  The big, glaring white elephant in the room is Obamacare.  Now, don't get me wrong.  I acknowledge there is a problem with our healthcare system in this country.  I also wouldn't mind having universal or "free" healthcare.  Hell, who doesn't like free stuff, right?  But at the same time, I'm also grounded in reality and practicality.  I applaud the boldness to "come up with something", but I just don't agree with this particular something.   First, it's forcing people to purchase medical coverage or suffer a penalty.  I don't care how you try to justify it, it's unconstitutional and sets a very dangerous precedent.  If the government can penalize you for not buying a product just because you have a heartbeat, what else could they justify you "needing" to have?  Second, the country cannot afford it.  It's fiscally unsound.  It racks up 250+ billion dollars in costs each year when fully implemented.  While the Democrats claim it will "only" cost 940 billion dollars over 10 years, what they fail to mention is that this cost is only for the 2010 - 2019 range where only 6 of those years (starting in 2014) are in full implementation.  If you look at 10 years of full implementation,  it's over 2 trillion dollars.  Third, and a point I'll touch on some more later, is the regulations supporting this bill stifles private sector growth in health care.  You know those nice little private practice clinics?  Obamacare regulations make it very hard for them to remain in business.    And this even extends beyond the health care sector.  The regulations in this bill make employing people in general a higher cost that companies will want to avoid whenever possible.  Again, I'm all for solving the problem.  I just don't think more government is the solution.  In fact, it's part of the problem.

Next, is his tax policies.  Besides using this area to score political points (but what politican doesn't politicize taxes right?), it's the reason our economy is still so crappy.  The world economy is growing, yet here's America behind the times with the highest corporate tax rate in the world.  The days of mooching off of corporations and penalizing them for going overseas is over.  They'll just continue to take their business elsewhere because there's no law that says they have to do business in the United States.  As a country, we have to compete on a global level to get the businesses to, you know, do business here.  And choking profits via high taxation drives away corporations, which in turn reduces tax revenue, which in turn makes our country go into further debt.  Again, I'm all for a fair tax policy.  Simplify it and make everyone pay the same.  Eliminate exploitable loop holes, all that jazz.  But it's just not smart to penalize the people that make the most money simply because they make the most money.  These people are the real job creators (side note: government can never be a legitimate job creator because a job created by the government is ultimately paid for by taxes.  Yeah, it's a job, but it doesn't really grow the economy).  And job creators will only create jobs if doing so will be profitable.  By stifling their capital, they not only have less money to hire people, they have less incentive to do so since its profitability comes into question.  More capital = more growth = more jobs = more tax revenue.  I can't get behind someone that seems content with smothering our capitalist economy.

Now, let's look at him on a world stage.  He's a weakling.  He's an American apologist.  He seems to have this idea that playing fair and being nice will award some type of international brownie points that will help us in the long run.  Except no, it won't.  The more power we vacate as a country on the world stage, the more some other, potentially hostile to America, nation will snatch it up.  There is no playing nice and expecting everyone else to.  There will always be jerks out there who will want to exploit weakness for gain.  In fact, many would see such submissive behavior as a sign of weakness.  So, as arguably the most powerful country on the planet, we don't apologize for being top dog.  This isn't to say we're blameless by any means.  But on the world stage, our President needs to send am America Comes First signal.  After all, he's out there looking out for our country right? But Obama does not.  He capitulates to the Russians who are led by a thug who IS strong willed and still harbors large amounts of animosity toward the West (remember that Putin is former KGB).  He spits in the face of Britain, our staunchest ally, by unceremoniously tossing out a bust of Winston Churchill from the White House.  He continually undermines Israel by having the Department of Defense leak Israel's military plans to the press.  And Iran is making a mockery out of him by continuing to lie straight to his face.  It's almost as if he's ashamed of this country and everything it's been and stood for (more on that later)....

And lastly, his failed energy policies.  He refuses to get the XL oil pipeline built, yet has been sinking billions into "green" energy companies that continue to fail.  While I'm not opposed to green energy alternatives, I'm also a realist.  We need oil.  We'll continue to need oil.  Deliberately cutting us off isn't going to make things magically go green and solve our energy issues.  We need an all of the above solution which, along with the "green" industries, includes oil, coal, and all the other "unsavory" energy sources that the EPA hates.  By deliberately crippling oil and forcefully pushing alternative energy, he's also tampering with the free market by "picking winners" (which turn out to still be losers) that drives up costs both on the energy we still rely upon (like oil) as well as taxes when all this green energy money gets sucked into nothingness.   It's time to be realistic.  Oil is a part of the lifeblood of our economy.  Trying to make the country go cold turkey is only going to make the economy ill.  While transitioning from oil and coal to more clean energies is a noble goal that we should continually strive to achieve, it cannot be forced down our throats so abruptly and must follow the natural flow of our economic system.  


This next part is actually a lot more damning to me than his policies.  While his policies are bad enough, the same can be said for Bush 43.  It's his controversial influences that have me truly worried about a second term free from the specter of re-election.  Below is a list of a few people who have been heavily influential on Obama.

Let's start with the granddaddy of modern activism and community organizing, Saul Alinksy.  If you're not familiar with the term community organizing, you probably should acquaint yourself.  On the surface, the intent is pretty basic, benign, and quite noble.  Communities get "organized" in order to unite and influence their political constituents.  Sounds simple enough and something every American would want to be a part of, right?  Except, underneath the surface, community organizing is also used as a tool for radical activism and revolution.  Sounds like ridiculous paranoia, right?  Well, enter Saul Alinsky, a community organizer who wrote Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals.  In this book, he discusses ways to use community organizing to bring forth revolution.  To sum it up, he condones deception & infiltration and is definitely an end justifies the means guy when it comes to fulfilling one's radical goals.  In other words, this book teaches one how to push their agenda without openly pushing their agenda.  Sound familiar?

Derrick Bell was a constitutional law professor for Harvard and later NYU.  Here you have what appears to be the triumph of a black man making something of himself and proving that opportunities in this country do exist, yet it's somewhat spoiled when you find out he's the progenitor of Critical Race Theory.  If you're not familiar with the idea, it can be distilled down into something like this:  The constitution, our laws, and our government in general are inherently racist because they were devised by a bunch of white guys.  And because of this inherent, naturally occurring, subconscious racism, non white races should receive special treatment for things to truly become "equal"; having a colorblind society just wasn't enough.  According to CRT, white supremacy is alive and well and need to be brought down.  This was a guy that Obama greatly admired and respected.  You could consider him one of Obama's mentors, seeing that it was Obama that introduced Bell at a diversity rally at Harvard, giving him a brotherly embrace and also had Bell write a blurb about his autobiography (which mysteriously isn't on the book any more).  

Another name you should know about.  This man was a leader of the Weather Underground, a self described Communist group with the ultimate goal of violently overthrowing the US government.  These people were home grown terrorists and as anti-American as they get.  Yeah, this stuff happened in the 70's and not much really came of it.  However, if you think Bill has calmed down and given up his fight, you'd be mistaken.  You could say he's taken a more Alinksy-esque approach by injecting himself into our education system to subvert fragile young minds toward his line of thinking and agenda.  While it's been denied quite vehemently about Obama and Ayers' level of association, I offer this article which compares both men's auto biographies.  Even if one wants to still claim that doesn't prove any direct association or influence, the similarities between the two works shows that Obama seems to be cut from the same cloth as Ayers.  

Most of us should know about him, right?  The firebrand, racist pastor of Obama for 20 some odd years that Obama was forced to throw under the bus in 2008?  And while the media wants to downplay the connection and he's largely forgotten 4 years later, it doesn't change the fact that he was Obama's spiritual advisor for 20 years.  You cannot sit there and tell me this man's radical viewpoints did not influence Obama.  He should never be forgotten.  Like Bill Ayers, just because he's not in the spotlight doesn't mean he's doing nothing.  

Bringing it all together

When you take a look at what he's done so far.  What he's said, like attempting to bully the Supreme Court's decision about Obamacare, so far.   His policies.  His blatant leftist agenda.  His failures.  Now take into consideration his influences and you have a President that, to me, rejects traditional American life and society and is working to change it how to he thinks it should be, just like all the other self indulgent leftist intellectuals that came before him.  Despite his failures and those of other leftist nations in the past, he presses on, blames them on his enemies, and continues to speak the same idealistic rhetoric that he's hoping people will swallow.   Using Alinsky's primer as a guide line, he's able to push his agenda in a matter that is not immediately alarming to the public, yet is pushing it all the same.

 I cannot support a man with not only an abysmal record, but with influences and an agenda that are counter to the American way of life that has been the American way of life for over 200 years.  This is why I don't want Obama leading our country.

Side Note on Socialism/Communism: It's a bit of irony, don't you think, that for the last 200 years our capitalist country and American way of life has prevailed largely intact.  Yet, for the leftists, it's corrupt and wrong.  But, every other socialist or communist nation in the world has failed within the same time period.  Yet despite this evidence, leftists still have the hubris to believe that "this time we'll get it right" because you know, they're so damn smart, their massive intellect won't fail where others have repeatedly failed before.   So while capitalism, conservatism, and individual liberty actually work and has a proven track record of working right here in the United States, it's always 'wrong' or 'dieing out'.  I just think the leftists can't handle that they and their massive intellects are wrong time and time again.